UNAPPROVED
OLD LYME ZONING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF PUBLIC HEARING
Monday, July 14, 2008
The Old Lyme Zoning Commission held a Public Hearing on Monday, June 14, 2008 at 7:30 p.m. at the Phoebe Griffin-Noyes Library. Members present were Tom Risom (Chairman), Jane Cable (Vice Chairman), Jane Marsh (Secretary), Patrick Looney, John Johnson, and Ted Kiritsis (Alternate). Also present was Ann Brown, Zoning Enforcement Officer and Mark Branse, Commission Counsel.
Chairman Risom called the Public Hearing to order at 7:41 p.m.
1. Special Permit Application to enlarge outbuilding, 7 Portland Avenue, Dennis and Valerie Melluzzo, applicants.
Ms. Marsh read the legal notice for the record. It was discovered that the legal notice indicated that the meeting date was June 14, 2008. Chairman Risom indicated that they would re-advertise and hold this public hearing in August.
Attorney Bennett was present to represent the Melluzzo’s and the Russell’s (Item 2). He asked the Commission to give him a few minutes of their time for clarification of a few things. Attorney Bennett noted that he has the distinction of having the first two applications under the amended R-10 Special Permit Regulations. He explained that he originally filed both these applications as variance applications. He referenced Attorney Branse’s Letter of April 11, 2008, which indicates that while a variance would be appropriate, the Regulations did not get published and approved as intended, but perhaps the result is a better Regulation. Attorney Bennett stated that in reading the regulations there is a reference in 9.1.3 to Section 13B. He explained that he has applied for
waivers with respect to both of the applications for the site plan. Attorney Bennett indicated that he has been informed that the Commission’s view on waivers in these circumstances is that they do not favor them. He indicated that had they proceeded this evening, he was going to ask for time to provide to surveys and ask for approval with an administrative review of the survey.
Attorney Bennett explained that the more significant issue has to do with the septic systems. He indicated that he expected a sign-off on both properties from the Health Department stating that the property was large enough and/or had good enough soils to sustain and support a fully conforming septic system. Attorney Bennett stated that he has some information that the position of the Commission is going to be that they must have a conforming septic system installed if they want a Special Exception for anything. He stated that the language of the Regulation as drafted based on Attorney Branse’s letter. Attorney Bennett pointed out that one of these projects is enclosure of an existing sun porch and there would be no further septic loading and no indication that there is a problem with the
septic system. He explained that in the other application the structure has been in existence since at least 1952 and in the processing of rebuilding this structure it got a few inches bigger; it did not change use or location. Attorney Bennett stated that both properties will sustain a septic system and the applicants have received that sign-off from the Health Department.
Attorney Bennett stated that the Zoning is not the Health Official and they are not the Public Health Code enforcer. He questioned why they have this requirement in the Zoning Regulations. Attorney Bennett indicated that he is aware that there are septic problems in Town, specifically along the shorefront. He stated that he has a problem with the Regulation as drawn and how it is going to be interpreted by the Commission may change the way these two applicants will proceed as they may chose to start with variance applications. Attorney Bennett stated that they have the appropriate sign-off from the appropriate authority that they can conform in the event that the septic system surfaces; he noted that they do not have a statement saying that the septic systems comply in all respects with the current
Health Code. Ms. Cable questioned whether this would be attainable by the August Regular Meeting. Attorney Bennett indicated that it may be but he is proceeding under the proposition that they do not because they were constructed some time ago under another Health Code.
Ms. Marsh stated that the intention of the Commission when they adopted this Regulation is that they were not going to know in advance of an application what type of enlargement would be submitted. She explained that when they chose to have these type of applicants come before them instead of the Zoning Board of Appeals, they decided that they wanted a current complying system, not one that complies with a previous Health Code. Ms. Marsh stated if the septic system was not up to the current Health Code, the Commission did not expect to see the application. She noted that they could take this type of application to the Zoning Board of Appeals. Attorney Bennett indicated that Ms. Marsh’s explanation is very different than the opinion given by Attorney Branse. He explained that he withdrew
the ZBA Applications as a result of Attorney Branse’s letter. Ms. Marsh stated that the purpose of the Regulation was to allow some applicants to come to the Zoning Commission and not have to prove a hardship to the Zoning Board of Appeals. Attorney Bennett stated that it seems that the Zoning Commission is trying to regulate septics with this Regulation. Ms. Marsh indicated that it is a gate-keeping type of Regulation. She noted that other applications have the option of going to the Zoning Board of Appeals.
Ms. Brown explained that Section 9.1.3 did not turn out in words exactly how the Commission intended it to and they are expecting to modify the Regulation to allow only applications that meet all Zoning Regulations, with the exception of lot size; expansions in a nonconforming location or exceeding bulk requirements would go to the Zoning Board of Appeals. Ms. Brown stated that an A-2 Survey is also required.
Chairman Risom questioned whether the applicants had letters indicating that the lots could support systems. Attorney Bennett stated that both lots could support systems but that is not the issue.
Chairman Risom apologized for the error in the legal notice and indicated that these two Public Hearings will be re-advertised and held on August 11, 2008.
2. Special Permit Application to construct an addition, 20 Ridgewood Road, Kenneth and Joanne Russell, applicants.
No action taken. The Public Hearing for this item will be held on August 11, 2008.
At 7:58 p.m. Chairman Risom adjourned the Public Hearing.
Respectfully submitted,
Susan J. Bartlett
Recording Secretary
| 
